Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["David Inglis" <mhcsa@verizon.net>]

Dieter,

Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of my post.

And I don’t know in which way the Keyline

marketing is involved with the Carbon Farmers scheme.

I don’t know either and I don’t have time to find out but it does not effect my estimation of the arguments anyway.

I was just

curious about the effect of subsoiling on the permanent humus in this layer.

Quite rightly because, in my experience in the absence of  a growing greenmanure or pasture Keyline subsoiling presents a real danger of releasing that OM for a net loss. Also one then embarks on the usual cycle of increased resource usage for diminishing returns, [see below]. I am not against the use of material resources but I am against uses that are addictive and ultimately counterproductive.

The Carbon Farmers site even has a page (which

I didn’t read) with selected quotes to argue against reforestation.

A.Yeoman does too[in Priority One].

This seems to be indicative of a narrow commercial focus rather than

a broad environmental concern. I have nothing against making money,

but we have to be honest about it.

It may, but if the solution does not involve making some money I doubt it will be adopted on a large enough scale to have a global impact even if mandated by government. Also I believe that A.Yeomans claims that Grassland sequesters more CO2 than forest. The fact that that grass can be turned into profit is a bonus, not the primary motivation.

Anyway, both seem to emphasize grass land as the best way for soil-improvement and

CO2 sequestration.

Subsoiling [with Keyline] in grassland is optimal because:

Roots are poised to take advantage of  newly opened substrata.    

Top growth and root growth can be ‘pulsed’ and controlled, and at a profit, initiating the process of soil formation. On bare ground the plough will hasten the demise of the soil as you suspect.

A mixed ‘sward’ will always have some component that will respond to the circumstances be it climatic, grazing or soil management induced or other. I have observed that soil development occurs best when it is uninterrupted and that if it is interrupted the reintroduction of the missing element [typically Warmth/coolth, moisture, light and to some extent fertility ] does not initiate the soil building immediately. In a short season climate like mine [NE USA] that can mean soil building conditions of only 1 month in 12.

Large quantities of water can be absorbed by the soil without surface erosion.

In my case (semi-arid

climate and clay soil), I found that the best way to improve the soil

is to feed it a varied diet consisting of green annuals together with

woody perennials (including brambles, shrubs, bushes and trees),

and let the roots do the subsoiling.

This is the natural way that has been done for eons. But we don’t have eons. At the very least we need some approach that in a very short period of time reverses the declines of the soil OM over the past couple of centuries and if land stewards hope to contribute to absorbing the CO2 from sources other  than Ag. Something far more radical than that will be required.

I commend you for what you are doing. Yeomans point is that the results of what you are doing can be greatly accelerated by the judicious use of simple but thoughtfully applied Human technology. It amazes me how controversial that idea is in some circles that purport to be ‘protecting the earth’.

Just thoughts.

David